sim reader code / master branch / ...

Peter Stuge peter at
Tue Jan 18 10:17:13 UTC 2011

Harald Welte wrote:
> In order to avoid the most common problems, I propose exporting
> something like a feature bitmask on the L1CTL, i.e.
> * L1CTL user code (layer23) can send a L1CTL_GET_FEAT_REQ request
> * laye1 in the phone sends a L1CTL_GET_FEAT_RESP with all the bits
>   set to 1 for the features it supports
> * L1CTL user code (layer23) can then check if all the features it needs are
>   supported by the L1.  IF not, it can simply abort or print a warning to the
>   user.

Any point in using names for features, rather than bits?

> Obvious bits I would consider are:
> - is this firmware compiled with TX support?
> - does this firmware contain a SIM reader driver?
> - does this firmware support BURST_IND?
> Maybe we could also include a static header containing a compile
> timestamp or the git date/revision that the firmware was built, as
> well as a name of the board.

Yes, all good stuff.


More information about the baseband-devel mailing list